Co-dependence requires that all actions taken have the approval of anyone who may be affected. Democracy looks for the approval of the majority. Totalitarian government uses political authority to suppress individual freedom and maintain total control over all citizens.

Recently I've discovered that opponents of the County Commissioners' initiatives have used tactics that resemble the following pattern. Assume that there is a presence of the first concept and frame a complaint in terms of the last. The apparent aim is to override the will of the majority.

An example is some of the comments from a well organized and motivated small group of people who oppose wastewater management, alternative energy (especially land-based wind), regional planning, site-specific economic development and anything that might end in an assessment of individual cost to implement.

At the same time while there has been almost universal support for the concepts involved, when a price is quoted for a project it seems that is the first time anyone pays attention. I define attention to be in two parts. One is from the advocates who push for adoption; the other is from the opponents who orchestrate a familiar process. Although the evidence supports the need, those opposed start with questions around the validity of the answers to who, what, when, where and how.

Another interesting gambit is the “Why don't you have a final and very specific complete development plan?” When that exists: “Why did you put that together without getting public input?” So public officials who spend money for development plans based on public input, sometimes in my experience gathered over several years, find out that those people did not represent the people who matter.

When I studied PsyWar Ops in the Army a principle they used was that in the battle for hearts and minds a persistent, well-organized, motivated and patient cadre will prevail over a less committed majority who do not have the time, energy and interest to engage in an activity that is understood as correct on an intellectual level but are not inclined to give overt support and are understandably resistant to paying for it.

It’s the battle about how we define our personal and public responsibility. Personally, I want a free ride and try as much as possible to figure out how to get someone else to pick up my tab. But I know when at the bar there comes the time when you pick it up or lose your pals. At this point I could quote any number of sermons, poems and essays, but I paraphrase one I heard in the last week. Are we in this together or are we on our own?

If we are all on our own, then unless an action is seen to address our short-term immediate well being it should be avoided, with a self-serving rationale that insulates us from public approbation. If we are in this together, we would connect our self-interest to the general interest and participate as a community member to solve a community problem.

Being in a culture that recognizes and rightly opposes a totalitarian form of government I am looking for some help with my co-dependent-leaning personality to get majority support for the proposals mentioned above that after agreeing intellectually to a proposal there would be a commitment to paying for its implementation.